A step too far? Media access to family courts

Published: 14th July 2009

From 27 April 2009, the media have been allowed access to the family courts ending the long established culture of confidentiality. Previously, all family court proceedings relating to divorce, financial settlements, injunctions and disputes about children have been private and have happened behind closed doors. The principle that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done, has prompted a move towards openness in the family courts and allowing the press to attend hearings and report on them.

Personal issues will now be open to scrutiny which may be particularly concerning to those with a high media profile where there is a possibility that their reputation could be damaged or sensitive information be released to the public. From a commercial perspective, sensitive financial information could be released inadvertently. The changes come of course at a time when following the Baby Peter case there is an increased public awareness of cases involving children and an increased demand for transparency.

Media access to the courts does not extend to hearings in Children Act or Financial Proceedings where the purpose is to try and negotiate a settlement with the assistance of the Judge or the Children's Welfare Officer, or to decide what evidence is required in financial proceedings. There also remains considerable restrictions on what actually may be reported. It therefore appears that parties to proceedings will retain their anonymity, but this may be of little comfort to those where the circumstances of the case are well known to the general public. The media's reporting is to be restricted to "the processes involved and the principles by which decisions are made", however it remains to be seen whether this will be adhered to.

Some examples have been given of when the court may find it appropriate to close their doors to the press such as to protect the interests of a child, for the safety of a party or witness, for the orderly conduct of proceedings or if justice would be impeded or prejudiced by admitting them. It is not yet known what degree of concern will be necessary to exclude the press, and how this may differ between courts and between judges across the country. However it is clear that concrete reasons will need to be given to be balanced against the principle of openness.

Only time will tell how this will affect the number of cases progressing to court and whether it will serve to place increased pressure on parties to avoid the court process. It may be that the risk of publication will prompt a greater number of out of court settlements as a person's desire to keep their private life private outweighs their desire to achieve the best possible outcome.

If you are unsure of whether these new provisions affect a forthcoming hearing for you or would like to discuss any issues raised in this update, please contact Carole Atkinson in our family law department on 0151 236 8989or e mail carole.atkinson@maceandjones.co.uk